On 04/27/2016 09:34 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 PM, Jon Elson <elson
at pico-systems.com> wrote:
Sure. A VAX 11/780 had a 5 MHz clock! Would be
hard for an emulator to NOT
beat that! Later models did run faster, but not vastly faster, due to the
technology of the time.
I'm not sure what would qualify as "vastly
faster", but I take it that
170.9 MHz doesn't?
(also required fewer clocks per instruction than the 11/780)
Well, running an
efficient simulator on a modern PC
processor with a 3+ GHz clock, with faster memory and larger
and faster cache, I think it would still beat that top/end
of the line VAX. But, I don't actually know for sure.
A well-tuned VAX design in a recent FPGA family (Xilinx 7-series or
newer, or Altera Stratix V or newer) might be able to outperform the
fastest "real" VAX, but perhaps not by a whole lot. FPGAs are
generally much more efficient at implementing RISC processors, but
it's difficult to get a whole lot more than 200 MHz for the
cost-optimized FPGAs, or 350 MHz for the (expensive)
performance-optimized FPGAs.
I've designed VHDL cores equivalent to microprocessors such as the RCA
1802, National Semiconductor PACE, and DEC/Western Digital LSI-11 (at
the microarchitecture level). I'd like to tackle something more
sophisticated, but it's hard to find enough time.
Wow, yeah, designing a hardware emulator on an FPGA for the
VAX would be a big project. Doing the same for the Alpha
architecture would be REALLY daunting, since a lot less was
done by microcode.
Jon